Goldwine, it's not only our choice of whether to believe, but how to believe.
In the Gospels Jesus uses the parable of seeds - some that are nourished and prosper in good soil, some that that take a fragile root in shallow earth, and some that are blown away on stony ground. This is what you seem to be saying, and it ties in to some extent with NC's assertion that God's word (as ultimate truth) can be found at the root of all things.
I understand this point, and respect your experience of faith. But I guess in some ways that means that we actually agree about the way (and degree) in which LotR is a reflection of the Bible, ie. not explicit, not intended, and very much 'in the eye of the beholder'. I'm echoing Bombadil's most recent point here. I've acknowledged the underlying chivalric Christian sensibility, but even this is very subtle, and, as we all seem to be saying, the book has a depth and appeal that all readers can enjoy, regardless of their spiritual beliefs (if any).
Auretauriel, the world is full of cliques and the pressure to conform. There is something of human nature in that. That's why I've expressed concern about appropriation and exclusivity, although thankfully most of the posts on this thread have been reasoned and tolerant. And there ARE many 'true believers' who are also respectful and tolerant, so it's impossible to generalise. Understanding Tolkien's religion and it's relation to the book is a worthy subject but shouldn't stop you, or anyone else, enjoying the narrative in your own way. In his letters and notes, Tolkien expressly wished for and appreciated that.
Non-conformist, I'm not sure about your distinction between magic and witchcraft in LotR. Regardless of dictionary definitions, I don't think that line of argument impacts on the relation between LotR and Christianity. For example, many myths have the kind of magic you refer to, as distinct from necromancy - Irish, Greek, Indian and so on. None of these myths are in any way Christian, yet in this way (the nature of magic) they are the same as LotR (in fact "faerie" was part of Tolkien's inspiration). As you said in an earlier post, perhaps we all try and mould experience to our own perspectives. This is fine, but you have to be careful - sometimes what you want to be 'true', just won't fit (I'm not talking about ultimate spiritual truths). Close relationships can teach you that - expect the unexpected!
It's a shame this thread has got technical problems. I think anyone who was able to read through all four pages in order would see many articulate and well-argued perspectives, and a fluid and often insightful exploration of a wide range of related issues. It could easily form the basis of a successful academic dissertation or thesis (for which I would expect at least a namecheck). My compliments to all.
My views have changed a little (see Page 3, if you can!) since the start, but in the end I would really recommend that people read Tolkien's letter to Walden (it's in my print of The Silmarillion). It does seem to me to be the final word, however we choose to interpret it.
Maril (and others), maybe we should go off-topic to continue any in-depth exploration of buddhism / truth / religion etc., as the link to Tolkien is getting rather tenuous. I DON'T want to stop, so I don't mind either way. Just a thought.
Save This Thread! Recover the missing pages! Well done everybody [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Peace
|